Dark Energy
-
Just thought-experimenting. If (as often happens) we represent 'spacetime' as a flat sheet (usually black rubber with white grid lines) and the distortion of spacetime by mass as a large ball sitting on the sheet, we can show the effect of gravity by rolling a smaller ball along the sheet, which will accelerate toward the large ball, and (ignoring friction) collide with or orbit. So far so good. In this model the flat sheet is suspended in 'nothing'. But, what if you 'zoomed out' and the sheet was actually curved? Imagine it is sitting on a massive sphere. If the sphere grows, so the 'universe' will expand. Indeed if the sheet itself were like the skin of a massive rubber ball, then this effect would be observed if the ball was inflated. So what we call 'dark energy' could simply be the inflation of whatever it is that 'supports' the universe. The turtles are sliding down the side of the shell. [^]
PooperPig - Coming Soon
-
Just thought-experimenting. If (as often happens) we represent 'spacetime' as a flat sheet (usually black rubber with white grid lines) and the distortion of spacetime by mass as a large ball sitting on the sheet, we can show the effect of gravity by rolling a smaller ball along the sheet, which will accelerate toward the large ball, and (ignoring friction) collide with or orbit. So far so good. In this model the flat sheet is suspended in 'nothing'. But, what if you 'zoomed out' and the sheet was actually curved? Imagine it is sitting on a massive sphere. If the sphere grows, so the 'universe' will expand. Indeed if the sheet itself were like the skin of a massive rubber ball, then this effect would be observed if the ball was inflated. So what we call 'dark energy' could simply be the inflation of whatever it is that 'supports' the universe. The turtles are sliding down the side of the shell. [^]
PooperPig - Coming Soon
Human mind was created to enable us to survive on earth. To find food and mate for reproduction. Explaining a concept beyond 3 dimensional space as "curved" is still using 3 dimensional concept. God doesn't owe us a "how" answer in human words. Our brains are not ready.
-
Human mind was created to enable us to survive on earth. To find food and mate for reproduction. Explaining a concept beyond 3 dimensional space as "curved" is still using 3 dimensional concept. God doesn't owe us a "how" answer in human words. Our brains are not ready.
This is like a fish trying understand gravity. Maybe the fish would imagine it as constant invisible water flowing downwards. Because the fish brain is created so it can understand and survive underwater environment it does not have the brain pathway to understand dry land.
-
Human mind was created to enable us to survive on earth. To find food and mate for reproduction. Explaining a concept beyond 3 dimensional space as "curved" is still using 3 dimensional concept. God doesn't owe us a "how" answer in human words. Our brains are not ready.
Pete Zahir wrote:
Human mind was created evolved to enable us to survive on earth.
ftfy
Pete Zahir wrote:
Explaining a concept beyond 3 dimensional space as "curved" is still using 3 dimensional concept.
Because I don't have the language to describe curving through a 4th dimension, not beause something cannot. Think of it as an analogy.
Pete Zahir wrote:
God doesn't owe us a "how" answer in human words.
What has 'god' got to do with it?
Pete Zahir wrote:
Our brains are not ready.
speak for yourself
PooperPig - Coming Soon
-
Pete Zahir wrote:
Human mind was created evolved to enable us to survive on earth.
ftfy
Pete Zahir wrote:
Explaining a concept beyond 3 dimensional space as "curved" is still using 3 dimensional concept.
Because I don't have the language to describe curving through a 4th dimension, not beause something cannot. Think of it as an analogy.
Pete Zahir wrote:
God doesn't owe us a "how" answer in human words.
What has 'god' got to do with it?
Pete Zahir wrote:
Our brains are not ready.
speak for yourself
PooperPig - Coming Soon
A curve requires 2 dimensions. You could plot a curve across the x and y, or y and z, etc If you read only a single axis coordinates (for instance assign all x values the same and read a curve's Y, it is indistinguishable from a line) A curve involving the 4th dimension is this: An object accelerating in a straight line. Translate axis where X is the distance travelled and y,z =0 Time is experienced differently as it speeds thus the 4th dimension and curve If you ignore the relativity changes in time, all you see is the straight ray on axis X
-
A curve requires 2 dimensions. You could plot a curve across the x and y, or y and z, etc If you read only a single axis coordinates (for instance assign all x values the same and read a curve's Y, it is indistinguishable from a line) A curve involving the 4th dimension is this: An object accelerating in a straight line. Translate axis where X is the distance travelled and y,z =0 Time is experienced differently as it speeds thus the 4th dimension and curve If you ignore the relativity changes in time, all you see is the straight ray on axis X
Pete Zahir wrote:
A curve requires 2 dimensions. You could plot a curve across the x and y, or y and z, etc
You think you can't curve in 3 dimensions? Wow - how the heck did we ever get to the moon?! Time is not the 4th dimension in question here. Time isn't really a dimension at all, except in sci fi movies and '4D Cinemas'
PooperPig - Coming Soon
-
A curve requires 2 dimensions. You could plot a curve across the x and y, or y and z, etc If you read only a single axis coordinates (for instance assign all x values the same and read a curve's Y, it is indistinguishable from a line) A curve involving the 4th dimension is this: An object accelerating in a straight line. Translate axis where X is the distance travelled and y,z =0 Time is experienced differently as it speeds thus the 4th dimension and curve If you ignore the relativity changes in time, all you see is the straight ray on axis X
-
Just thought-experimenting. If (as often happens) we represent 'spacetime' as a flat sheet (usually black rubber with white grid lines) and the distortion of spacetime by mass as a large ball sitting on the sheet, we can show the effect of gravity by rolling a smaller ball along the sheet, which will accelerate toward the large ball, and (ignoring friction) collide with or orbit. So far so good. In this model the flat sheet is suspended in 'nothing'. But, what if you 'zoomed out' and the sheet was actually curved? Imagine it is sitting on a massive sphere. If the sphere grows, so the 'universe' will expand. Indeed if the sheet itself were like the skin of a massive rubber ball, then this effect would be observed if the ball was inflated. So what we call 'dark energy' could simply be the inflation of whatever it is that 'supports' the universe. The turtles are sliding down the side of the shell. [^]
PooperPig - Coming Soon
Those are definitely good points, but here comes the turtle. Spacetime has been confused, widely, because of the terms of "sheet" for spacetime. Although the analogy is good, simple and easier to imagine. The problem comes, when you are trying to depict how gravity works; straight-line in which direction, how much space bends, how is it that a space is always bent towards the centre? These are a few problems that arise in minds when we consider spacetime to be a sheet. I don't believe in dark matter, dark every and stuff similar to that. What I believe and can theorize is that "spacetime" is just the medium for "electromagnetic waves". We were lied when we were told, "light travels in vacuum". Physics books should be updated to include accurate descriptions over simplicit wrong explanations. Accordingly, the dark matter is nothing, but just another "level" of electromagnetic spectrum, which we have not yet discovered or come up against. We know Gammas are the strongest (in the means of their energy), who knows of the other way around? This is where Quantum jumps in and breaks the very simple common sense. They take us in worlds, where we cannot go, and try to explain our worldly problems in an inter-universal solution format. For example, instead of explaining Big bang, they are finding answers to Multiverse, instead of creating equipment sensitive enough to focus on a single electron particle, they are calling it a wave. :laugh: What a lame excuse; same as the one programmers make by saying, "It works on my machine!". Physics, needs abnormal people, who are able to imagine the world in an unusual way. Normal people are just making it worse. :-) Or... am I missing the joke symbol here? ;-)
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
-
Pete Zahir wrote:
A curve requires 2 dimensions. You could plot a curve across the x and y, or y and z, etc
You think you can't curve in 3 dimensions? Wow - how the heck did we ever get to the moon?! Time is not the 4th dimension in question here. Time isn't really a dimension at all, except in sci fi movies and '4D Cinemas'
PooperPig - Coming Soon
The earth/moon system is speeding around the sun at hundreds of thousands of km/h. The speed and precision required to reach the moon without the earth/moon system disappearing into the distance must have been remarkable.
-
So does light travel in a ray or does it not
-
Just thought-experimenting. If (as often happens) we represent 'spacetime' as a flat sheet (usually black rubber with white grid lines) and the distortion of spacetime by mass as a large ball sitting on the sheet, we can show the effect of gravity by rolling a smaller ball along the sheet, which will accelerate toward the large ball, and (ignoring friction) collide with or orbit. So far so good. In this model the flat sheet is suspended in 'nothing'. But, what if you 'zoomed out' and the sheet was actually curved? Imagine it is sitting on a massive sphere. If the sphere grows, so the 'universe' will expand. Indeed if the sheet itself were like the skin of a massive rubber ball, then this effect would be observed if the ball was inflated. So what we call 'dark energy' could simply be the inflation of whatever it is that 'supports' the universe. The turtles are sliding down the side of the shell. [^]
PooperPig - Coming Soon
It doesn't matter what 'shape' space/time takes in the slightest. The flat rubber sheet is, after all, a huge abstraction for the purposes of demonstrating the displacement theory of gravity. What 'dark energy' is supposed to explain is not expansion per se but the perceived acceleration of that expansion against all logic if you accept the standard cosmological model. Personally I can't help thinking that if you have to start making up stuff to fill in the gaps in your model than it's probably time to bin the model but then my living doesn't come from grants for research in theoretical physics! I did wonder to myself the other day if the explanation could simply be that as inflation increases, and the distance between masses increases along with it, gravitational drag is reduced, ie. the brakes are taken off, but then I figured if I'd thought of that there's probably a couple of thousand papers out there telling me why it's rubbish. Sometimes it's easier to sleep at night just knowing what you don't know.
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
-
So does light travel in a ray or does it not
-
Pete Zahir wrote:
A curve requires 2 dimensions. You could plot a curve across the x and y, or y and z, etc
You think you can't curve in 3 dimensions? Wow - how the heck did we ever get to the moon?! Time is not the 4th dimension in question here. Time isn't really a dimension at all, except in sci fi movies and '4D Cinemas'
PooperPig - Coming Soon
Be nice. Calculus isn't included in computing courses.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Yes it doesn't. Or no it does. It's definitely one of those.
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
But a ray cannot deviate from a straight line. Light however can bend due to gravity. Someone has been lying but the question is who.
-
Those are definitely good points, but here comes the turtle. Spacetime has been confused, widely, because of the terms of "sheet" for spacetime. Although the analogy is good, simple and easier to imagine. The problem comes, when you are trying to depict how gravity works; straight-line in which direction, how much space bends, how is it that a space is always bent towards the centre? These are a few problems that arise in minds when we consider spacetime to be a sheet. I don't believe in dark matter, dark every and stuff similar to that. What I believe and can theorize is that "spacetime" is just the medium for "electromagnetic waves". We were lied when we were told, "light travels in vacuum". Physics books should be updated to include accurate descriptions over simplicit wrong explanations. Accordingly, the dark matter is nothing, but just another "level" of electromagnetic spectrum, which we have not yet discovered or come up against. We know Gammas are the strongest (in the means of their energy), who knows of the other way around? This is where Quantum jumps in and breaks the very simple common sense. They take us in worlds, where we cannot go, and try to explain our worldly problems in an inter-universal solution format. For example, instead of explaining Big bang, they are finding answers to Multiverse, instead of creating equipment sensitive enough to focus on a single electron particle, they are calling it a wave. :laugh: What a lame excuse; same as the one programmers make by saying, "It works on my machine!". Physics, needs abnormal people, who are able to imagine the world in an unusual way. Normal people are just making it worse. :-) Or... am I missing the joke symbol here? ;-)
The shit I complain about It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem ~! Firewall !~
Afzaal Ahmad Zeeshan wrote:
I don't believe in dark matter, dark every and stuff similar to that
Quite. What these people don't seem to realise is that if there's all this "dark" stuff distorting everything, then everything they're seeing through telescopes is distorted and wrong, therefore all their assumptions based on that information are wrong, therefore there's no "dark" anything.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
Afzaal Ahmad Zeeshan wrote:
I don't believe in dark matter, dark every and stuff similar to that
Quite. What these people don't seem to realise is that if there's all this "dark" stuff distorting everything, then everything they're seeing through telescopes is distorted and wrong, therefore all their assumptions based on that information are wrong, therefore there's no "dark" anything.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
The truth is this: Fall of the angel of light resulted in the fall of light speed. The slowing light generated massive red shift. And was now moving slower to be affected by gravity. Dark matter/dark energy was an entity invented to make the naturalistic explanation fit. Occam's razor would removd it.
-
It doesn't matter what 'shape' space/time takes in the slightest. The flat rubber sheet is, after all, a huge abstraction for the purposes of demonstrating the displacement theory of gravity. What 'dark energy' is supposed to explain is not expansion per se but the perceived acceleration of that expansion against all logic if you accept the standard cosmological model. Personally I can't help thinking that if you have to start making up stuff to fill in the gaps in your model than it's probably time to bin the model but then my living doesn't come from grants for research in theoretical physics! I did wonder to myself the other day if the explanation could simply be that as inflation increases, and the distance between masses increases along with it, gravitational drag is reduced, ie. the brakes are taken off, but then I figured if I'd thought of that there's probably a couple of thousand papers out there telling me why it's rubbish. Sometimes it's easier to sleep at night just knowing what you don't know.
I am not a number. I am a ... no, wait!
Yes, but it's all based on "observations" of a handful of supernovae seeming to cool faster than expected, and an assumption based on that that they're moving further away quicker than was previously assumed. Me, I reckon that since we don't know precisely the dynamics of supernovae, something else is happening either to make them cool faster than anticipated, or to block/absorb some of the heat, again making them appear to cool faster than anticipated. Something like an expanding cloud of dust that's recently been fused into higher-order atoms and molecules would likely have that kind of effect -- but what are the chances of something like that conveniently surrounding a supernova, eh? Nah, it's much more likely that some idiot needed to publish something radical quickly, or lose his research grant there's some mysterious "dark" thingummy that's at back of it all.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
But a ray cannot deviate from a straight line. Light however can bend due to gravity. Someone has been lying but the question is who.
-
The truth is this: Fall of the angel of light resulted in the fall of light speed. The slowing light generated massive red shift. And was now moving slower to be affected by gravity. Dark matter/dark energy was an entity invented to make the naturalistic explanation fit. Occam's razor would removd it.
Damn those angels! They're always confusing things!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
So does light travel in a ray or does it not
